Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the line of reasoning behind all law (or at least all law that carries the death penalty).
> (or at least all law that carries the death penalty) So, nearly no law - and in fact no law in countries without the death penalty?
The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
51–60 of 109 posts
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not really true, MDMA in high doses does have dangerous acute effects which can be deadly (hyponatremia, hyperthermia). See f.e. Martha Fernback, Anna Wood. I mean even if you die from water poisoning or heart attack (at the age of 15), that would not happen if you don't ingest MDMA beforehand.
OK, if you're a 45kg woman and you take six pills in an evening and then drink 10 liters of water, you'll die. If you get crushed in a crowd surge, you might die. Blaming those on MDMA specifically is usually fatuous though, even if it was a precursor. It's like saying that eating McDonalds is implicated in street racing deaths because some people who die in street races do so with McDonalds wrappers in the car.
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#53Although this had unfortunate consequences, and would be unthinkable in today's enlightened world, I'm not sure the line of reasoning here was unreasonable. The idea that manufacturers would be allowed to produce vast quantities of a partially illegal substance, without putting in efforts to prevent illegal use, seems unreasonable. Imagine the outcry if it turned out Phizer was manufacturing all the heroin. (They and…
We still do this. Don't drink a bottle of rubbing ethanol (not taxed as drinking alcohol) or you will get extremely sick: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubbing_alcohol#US_legislation
Denatured ethanol comes up more at the hardware store.
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK, if you're a 45kg woman and you take six pills in an evening and then drink 10 liters of water, you'll die. If you get crushed in a crowd surge, you might die. Blaming those on MDMA specifically is usually fatuous though, even if it was a precursor. It's like saying that eating McDonalds is implicated in street racing deaths because some people who die in street races do so with McDonalds wrappers in the car.
If I take a drug that induces me to drink 10 litres of water, am I at fault for drinking 10 litres of water or does the drug have some culpability?
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not really true, MDMA in high doses does have dangerous acute effects which can be deadly (hyponatremia, hyperthermia). See f.e. Martha Fernback, Anna Wood. I mean even if you die from water poisoning or heart attack (at the age of 15), that would not happen if you don't ingest MDMA beforehand.
OK, if you're a 45kg woman and you take six pills in an evening and then drink 10 liters of water, you'll die. If you get crushed in a crowd surge, you might die. Blaming those on MDMA specifically is usually fatuous though, even if it was a precursor. It's like saying that eating McDonalds is implicated in street racing deaths because some people who die in street races do so with McDonalds wrappers in the car.
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not really true, MDMA in high doses does have dangerous acute effects which can be deadly (hyponatremia, hyperthermia). See f.e. Martha Fernback, Anna Wood. I mean even if you die from water poisoning or heart attack (at the age of 15), that would not happen if you don't ingest MDMA beforehand.
OK, if you're a 45kg woman and you take six pills in an evening and then drink 10 liters of water, you'll die. If you get crushed in a crowd surge, you might die. Blaming those on MDMA specifically is usually fatuous though, even if it was a precursor. It's like saying that eating McDonalds is implicated in street racing deaths because some people who die in street races do so with McDonalds wrappers in the car.
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#57Just like there are regularly reported "MDMA deaths" in the mainstream media despite MDMA never having been reasonably blamed for any death (beyond crazy "took 50x recommended dosage" or disingenuous "took something they thought was MDMA but was actually ketamine" cases).
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#58Who would poison our liquor without government?
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
It surely does have something to do with that, but the point is that it wouldn't be possible if Oxy weren't well-suited for recreational use.
But the entity deciding to lace certain drugs with another drug designed to harm a class of users, and deciding to not lace certain other drugs, is the same entity that runs the legal Oxy cartel. Surely it's not possible to believe that part of their actions in this regard are motivated by any sort of social concern. Or am I missing something? PS: this, of course, not getting into the obvious immorality of lacing a d…
It's not to harm addicts. It's to discourage recreational use in the first place. If you're prescribed Vicodin and are warned about the harmful effects of taking more than the prescribed amount, you are less likely to act on the "what the hell, might as well pop 3 or 4 and get a buzz" thought that pretty much anyone prescribed these drugs could reasonably have at some point. So you never start on the path to becoming a self-destructive addict.
Re: The US government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition (2010)
#60You can't distill ethanol to 100%, only 95%. To get the last 5% of water out you typically add benzene or cyclohexane, which remains as a trace contaminant in the final product.
Also note that methanol (and other unsavory small molecules) normally contaminate distilled ethanol unless you actively take steps to remove them. For something you intend to drink, you need to carefully control fermentation to reduce the amount of methanol, toss out the early distillation fractions to remove as much methanol as you can, and then let your remaining distillate sit in an open tank for a couple of weeks to let whatever methanol remains evaporate off (along with some of your product).
If you're making ethanol as an industrial solvent or fuel, you don't need to do these things. It's not crazy that under prohibition, taking all those extra steps would be seen as evidence of an intention to violate the law and make drinkable spirits.
But whatever, Slate says it was a conspiracy to poison poor people, I'm sure that's the right explanation.